Fiddling While Deficit Burns

April 27, 1985

The Senate flinched again Friday on the urgent task left over from last year -- attacking deficits. Even though the economy has grown at an anemic 1.3 percent annual rate since January, it will be May -- a full half year after the election -- before the Senate passes a budget. This dawdling invites a new recession.

If people are numbed by all the talk about deficits, they surely don't want to be reminded what a recession feels like. That's what this reckless borrowing will bring -- an economic slowdown that will make $200 billion deficits look puny. Yet the Senate got bogged down in parliamentary maneuvering and political point-making that produced nothing.

The debating couldn't even begin because of a double whammy. A few Republicans, such as Florida Sen. Paula Hawkins, wouldn't vote for the Republican plan as a starting point because they reject its limit on Social Security increases. Mrs. Hawkins and others refused even though they would have a shot later at knocking that out of the bill. With an election in Florida next year, she must figure it's best not to be on record in any way as having voted to trim Social Security.

Meanwhile, Democratic senators were united against using the Republican plan as a starting point even though they have no alternative to call their own. The upshot: paralysis tinged with politics.

It would help if Senate Majority Leader Robert Dole could get the votes to make his plan the starting point simply because that would tend to make his spending figure of $969 billion a ceiling. That would stifle senators of both parties who are itching to restore spending but are reluctant to match that with cuts elsewhere. Leading the popularity parade is higher spending for Social Security. If somehow the Senate can muster the will to limit annual increases to 2 percent, the compromise backed by President Reagan, that would give deficit-cutting some credibility. So too would a successful effort to cut Mr. Reagan's plan to give the Pentagon 7 percent more.

Expect two kinds of misleading rhetoric from many Democrats. First, they want more money for such future-building areas as research and development. Sorry, but cutting deficits is more important. Second, Florida Sen. Lawton Chiles and others will talk about closing loopholes that let corporations and fat cats pay too little. That sounds fine, but it's a very unlikely way to cut deficits because Mr. Reagan has sworn to veto any tax increase, and a third of the House has sworn to uphold him. Checkmate.

The gridlock in Congress might be amusing if the economy wasn't so close to gridlock itself. If Congress won't slash deficits now, a recession will balloon them beyond belief. And if you think the answers are tough now, wait until then.